Although lip service is paid to the recognition of home language as an element of identity building and cultural integrity, educational language policies in Flanders – as in many other European countries – are currently characterized by a reinforced monolingual ideology. Educational failure of non-Dutch speaking students is primarily – and often exclusively – explained by insufficient skills in Standard Dutch. It has become so commonsensical (a doxa) that Standard Dutch language deficiency leads imperatively to low achievement not only regarding reading/writing literacy but also scientific and mathematical literacy. A deficiency paradigm of teaching and learning – based on monolingual ideologies – has been constructed, leading to  policy measures  principally focusing on standard language learning and language testing, in some cases even as a condition for participation in  education.  A revival of remedial teaching and pull-out practices can be noticed demonstrating the efficiency of such interventions

The monolingual paradigm, constructed by the education policy makers, is highly ideologically driven and can be situated in the particular socio-political situation of Flanders. The ‘linguistic capital’,  brought to the school by pupils with different social and ethnic backgrounds is seen as less valuable and even obstructive for a successful school career.

In this contribution, teachers’ perceptions on home language of the pupils and their parents, and language use in the classroom, during recreation or informal learning activities are looked at. Monolingual ideologies strongly impact not only on the perceptions and beliefs of teachers, but also on their inter-subjective relations, particularly the teacher-pupil-relations (Woolard and Shieffelin, 2000; Pacini-Ketchabaw and Armstrong de Almeida, 2006; Wortham, 2008). Pupils’ linguistic capital is not activated and used as a didactical resource for learning. It is suppressed. The believe that immigrant pupils lack the linguistic skills needed to be successful at school are overemphasized . This affects pupils’ beliefs, and their self esteem, classroom involvement and motivation for learning. Unwillingly, these mutually reinforcing mechanisms contribute to processes of social reproduction (Bourdieu, 1990; Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977; Ogbu, 1990, 1998; Lamont, 1992, 2005; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001 and Roosens, 1995, 1998).

The main purpose of this study is to gain insight in the perceptions of teachers in second grade of secondary education in Flanders regarding monolingual language policies. To what extent adopt teachers in secondary education the national monolingual language ideologies? What are the factors and circumstances determining the level of teachers’ adherence to or rejection of monolingual education ideologies? What are the effects of strong monolingual beliefs held by teachers on teacher-pupil-relations and academic achievements of pupils?

So far, teachers’ adherence  to these monolingual education policies has been mainly the subject of qualitative research. Few researchers have investigated the adherence to and propagation of monolingual language ideologies at the teacher level using quantitative research methods. This study  aims at filling this research lacuna. Based on quantitative research data, generalizations can be made as to the  extent of the adherence to monolingual language ideologies; unlike qualitative data only offering insights in tendencies and indications. 

Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J-C. (1977) Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage Publications. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. California: Stanford University Press. Lamont, M. (1992). Money, morals and manners: the culture of the French and the American upper middle class. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press. Lamont, M. & Fleming, C. M. (2005). Everyday antiracism. Competence and religion in the cultural repertoire of the African American Elite. Du bois review: social science research on race, vol 2, nr 1: 29-43. Pacini-Ketchabaw, Veronica & Ana-Elisa Armstrong de Almeida (2006). Language discourses and ideologies at the heart of early childhood education. The International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(3): 310-341. Rumbaut, R.G. and Portes, A. (2001). Ethnicities: Children of Immigrants in America. Berkeley: University of California Press. Roosens, E. (ed.) (1995). Rethinking culture, ‘multicultural society’ and the school. Oxford: Pergamon. Roosens, Eugene (1998). Eigen grond eerst? Primordiale autochtonie: dilemma van de multiculturele samenleving. Leuven: Acco Van den Branden, K., P. Van Avermaet & M. Van Houtte (Eds.) (2011). Equity and Excellence in Education. London, New York: Routledge. Woolard, Kathryn A., & Schieffelin, Bambi B. (1994). Language ideology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 23, 55-82. Wortham, Stanton (2008). Linguistic anthropology of education. Annual Review of Anthropology, 37, 37-51.